IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Joel Sauer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-08-04 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2005-06 Billings Bulls NAHL 54 5 15 20 0.370 0.1316 0.1365 0.3889 0.4035
2006-07 Wichita Falls Wildcats NAHL 62 8 28 36 0.581 0.2062 0.2038 0.6096 0.6025
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2010-11 Augsburg D3 MIAC SR 26 14 25 39 1.500
2009-10 Augsburg D3 — JR 27 16 16 32 1.185
2008-09 Augsburg D3 — SO 26 15 16 31 1.192
2007-08 Augsburg D3 — FR 21 7 0 7 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2007-08 · Augsburg
+120.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#28775
Forward overall
#914
Forward born in 1987
#2495
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Reuschlein
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor May
Adrian · 2018-19
0.783 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Gibson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2009-10
1.038 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Porrier
Johnson & Wales · 2009-10
0.654 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.